I am also a little less concerned about some of the pass protection with the theoretically better RB's making their life easier. Years ago, John Madden wrote in his book that he always liked drafting OL and Al Davis always liked drafting DB's, and that worked for those great Raider teams because those were the hardest positions to adjust to at the pro level. For as much as I like TT's drafts and the all over depth of the team, OL seems to be less than his strong suit. Even with devoting high round picks to some at these positions, we never seem to get much better along the line. I hope that trend changes going forward or A-Rod is going to have a much shorter career than I would like.

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" --Albert Einstein

The only reason they moved Bulaga to the right side, was because he had shorter arms than Sherrod.

Bulaga doesn't even make my list of worries about this team.

I thought they moved Bulaga to RT because they had a healthy LT Clifton and an injury RT Tausher.

I think they kept Bulaga over there because he's clearly a top RT in the NFL and because the other OTs (Newhouse Sherrod) didn't have near the power and might struggle more against powerful bull rushers which they might see more of on the right side.

America's team Of the people by the people for the people Packer People~ madeby ~ pack93z ~

I echo some of these thoughts. Bulaga gets a bad rap because of one-half of football against Seattle. Beyond that half, he's been a rock solid player for this organization since 2011. The tape bares this out.

My worry, however, is that you're taking a very good right tackle and exchanging him for an average left tackle. Baltimore did this with Michael Oher, who didn't have the technique or quickness to play the left side. It stunted his growth and he hasn't been the same player since (on left or right side).

Bulaga has the intelligence and technique to play the position, but I'm not sure the natural ability is there. I worry the Packers are taking him down the same path Baltimore did with Oher.

I tend to disagree with this. Bulaga was really good in 2011. However, in 2012, he was fairly bad BEFORE his injury knocked him out for the season. Maybe he was somehow playing hurt, but that wasn't ever publicized, so the big question in my mind is can he get back to 2011 form? I'm about 63% sure that he can and will.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans. If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.

My thoughts on the OL are probably pretty well known, but I haven't stated them in a month or so.....

Newhouse: Average. Substantially better at RT than LT. I think his biggest problem at LT was that he was still thinking too much instead of moving naturally,and that slowed his movement. I think he won't have that over-thinking problem on the right side. I'm okay with this move, as he will be more of a positive contributor than he was.Lang: Overrated. Mediocre at LG. Hopefully will be better at RG. Position will definitely be worse. Hopefully he will be no more of a negative on right than on left.Dietrich-Smith: Serviceable. Nothing to get excited about for bad or good.Sitton: A stud at RG. Hopefully he'll be a stud at LG, too. But part of me says the net effect will be downgrade (the loss of Sitton at RG won't be made up, quite, by the improvement at LG as he learns the new position).Bulaga: If not for Lang, IMO would be most overrated player on the line. I just don't see what everyone else seems to have seen in 2011. I thought he was an average RT. I think Newhouse at RT may prove better than Bulaga, and I don't think he will be worse. Maybe Bulaga's one of those guys who will be better at LT than at RT. And event if he isn't, he may well be better at LT than Newhouse was.

Back-ups: I refuse to get excited about what is, in the end, nothing more than "potential" as yet unrealized. If they come on and perform well when needed, I'll be happy. If one of them beats out Lang, I wouldn't be surprised. And, who knows, maybe the team will get lucky and find a Sitton-esque talent among them to replace Bulaga and/or Newhouse. But I'm not going to expect any of that. I see them as "potential" now, and I expect that's what most of them will still be in both October and January.

And one thing I just don't buy from Thompson/McCarthy/Campen on the OL anymore is the "great potential" argument when it is made about an offensive lineman.

Summary: I'll be ecstatic if an improvement is somehow found for Lang. I'm very leery of moving the all-pro Sitton because it may negate some of the contribution by the one undeniable stud on the line. I'm not sold on either Bulaga or Newhouse, but have no problem with the switch since I don't see anyone better than either on the roster yet.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

My thoughts on the OL are probably pretty well known, but I haven't stated them in a month or so.....

Newhouse: Average. Substantially better at RT than LT. I think his biggest problem at LT was that he was still thinking too much instead of moving naturally,and that slowed his movement. I think he won't have that over-thinking problem on the right side. I'm okay with this move, as he will be more of a positive contributor than he was.Lang: Overrated. Mediocre at LG. Hopefully will be better at RG. Position will definitely be worse. Hopefully he will be no more of a negative on right than on left.Dietrich-Smith: Serviceable. Nothing to get excited about for bad or good.Sitton: A stud at RG. Hopefully he'll be a stud at LG, too. But part of me says the net effect will be downgrade (the loss of Sitton at RG won't be made up, quite, by the improvement at LG as he learns the new position).Bulaga: If not for Lang, IMO would be most overrated player on the line. I just don't see what everyone else seems to have seen in 2011. I thought he was an average RT. I think Newhouse at RT may prove better than Bulaga, and I don't think he will be worse. Maybe Bulaga's one of those guys who will be better at LT than at RT. And event if he isn't, he may well be better at LT than Newhouse was.

Back-ups: I refuse to get excited about what is, in the end, nothing more than "potential" as yet unrealized. If they come on and perform well when needed, I'll be happy. If one of them beats out Lang, I wouldn't be surprised. And, who knows, maybe the team will get lucky and find a Sitton-esque talent among them to replace Bulaga and/or Newhouse. But I'm not going to expect any of that. I see them as "potential" now, and I expect that's what most of them will still be in both October and January.

And one thing I just don't buy from Thompson/McCarthy/Campen on the OL anymore is the "great potential" argument when it is made about an offensive lineman.

Summary: I'll be ecstatic if an improvement is somehow found for Lang. I'm very leery of moving the all-pro Sitton because it may negate some of the contribution by the one undeniable stud on the line. I'm not sold on either Bulaga or Newhouse, but have no problem with the switch since I don't see anyone better than either on the roster yet.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

My thoughts on the OL are probably pretty well known, but I haven't stated them in a month or so.....

Newhouse: Average. Substantially better at RT than LT. I think his biggest problem at LT was that he was still thinking too much instead of moving naturally,and that slowed his movement. I think he won't have that over-thinking problem on the right side. I'm okay with this move, as he will be more of a positive contributor than he was.Lang: Overrated. Mediocre at LG. Hopefully will be better at RG. Position will definitely be worse. Hopefully he will be no more of a negative on right than on left.Dietrich-Smith: Serviceable. Nothing to get excited about for bad or good.Sitton: A stud at RG. Hopefully he'll be a stud at LG, too. But part of me says the net effect will be downgrade (the loss of Sitton at RG won't be made up, quite, by the improvement at LG as he learns the new position).Bulaga: If not for Lang, IMO would be most overrated player on the line. I just don't see what everyone else seems to have seen in 2011. I thought he was an average RT. I think Newhouse at RT may prove better than Bulaga, and I don't think he will be worse. Maybe Bulaga's one of those guys who will be better at LT than at RT. And event if he isn't, he may well be better at LT than Newhouse was.

Back-ups: I refuse to get excited about what is, in the end, nothing more than "potential" as yet unrealized. If they come on and perform well when needed, I'll be happy. If one of them beats out Lang, I wouldn't be surprised. And, who knows, maybe the team will get lucky and find a Sitton-esque talent among them to replace Bulaga and/or Newhouse. But I'm not going to expect any of that. I see them as "potential" now, and I expect that's what most of them will still be in both October and January.

And one thing I just don't buy from Thompson/McCarthy/Campen on the OL anymore is the "great potential" argument when it is made about an offensive lineman.

Summary: I'll be ecstatic if an improvement is somehow found for Lang. I'm very leery of moving the all-pro Sitton because it may negate some of the contribution by the one undeniable stud on the line. I'm not sold on either Bulaga or Newhouse, but have no problem with the switch since I don't see anyone better than either on the roster yet.

Brian Bulaga undoubtedly played very well many times. I really don't how some missed that. He definitely had a couple of bad games in 2012, and then got hurt. I'm certainly not going to use a few bad games to judge a player as a whole, and the play calling also has to take at least a small percentage of that blame. Bulaga was integral to a Super Bowl run and win, and played very well for stretches. He was somewhat inconsistent, but how many offensive linemen aren't? Perhaps the elite players, but there aren't many of those and most teams won't have even one, especially when drafting late every year. Make no mistake, Bulaga was a good to very good right tackle, and at times, even better. Some exceptions here and there doesn't change that.

With that being said, I don't expect him to be as good at left tackle, unfortunately. I guess I can understand the logic of doing so, but I think Bulaga is much better suited for the right side, just as Newhouse probably is. It's a fairly typical problem in the NFL. There just aren't many really good left tackles out there, which is why the most recent draft panned out as it did.

As I said, I will never expect anything other than an average offensive line under the current coaching structure. Average is probably the best-case scenario. Hopefully they can actually achieve average, because if they do, the Packers will be right in the mix of contenders.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.